- Determination of the will (Freedom) These are; i. Utilitarianism: According to this concept people should endeavour to maximise welfare or utility in terms of Economics. 451). Some of the arguments for consequentialism are: As a little girl, I have always loved, cherished, respected, and admired animals. 1. It was not until I had been with a guy for about a year, that my beliefs were finally... ...murder? It is an improvement from flaw of utilitarianism. Kantianism vs Utilitarianism • Attitude towards what is right or wrong is what constitutes the basic difference between utilitarianism and Kantianism. iii. Consequentialism vs Utilitarianism . Thus the right action of an agent, in a particular circumstance is that action among alternative actions that produces over all best result. Killing one person to save lives of another ten is allowed by Consequentialism. German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an opponent of Consequentialism, and propagated a deontological moral theory of ethics, which is popularly known as Kantianism theory of Ethics. Please join StudyMode to read the full document. Cite and updated on September 23, 2014, Difference Between Similar Terms and Objects, Differences Between Consequentialism and Kantianism, Difference Between Hindu And Buddhist meditation, Difference Between Upper Middle Class and Lower Middle Class, Difference Between Deontology and Teleology, Difference Between Act and Rule Utilitarianism, The Difference Between Connectivism and Constructivism, Difference between Moderna and Pfizer Vaccine, Difference Between GDPR and Privacy Shield, Difference Between Vitamin D and Vitamin D3, Difference Between LCD and LED Televisions, Difference Between Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates, Difference Between Civil War and Revolution. Utilitarianism is a specific version of consequentialism, and the most common one. This approach to ethics is based upon the aphorism, ‘ends justify the means’. * Many may see actions as being a temporary thing that is soon forgotten or has disappeared for all time, therefore one may reason that in the long-term just the results remain, hence, the main aspect that mainly matters with regards to an action is its results. Kantianism does not encourage retributive justice. These principles are the good will, establishing morality by reasoning alone, categorical imperative, duty rather than inclination, and summary and illustration. In the worst case scenario, would this not leave an opening for cold-blooded murders to kill people without their consent, and make false claims that they did have their consent? Consequentialism may lead bad action to good consequences. I used to say little prayers when I was little girl, but I was always so unsure of what actually existed. • Categorized under Miscellaneous | Differences Between Consequentialism and Kantianism. Morality is based upon such imperatives and commanded by such imperatives, and no one can escape and claim exception. Thus if one says that ‘I am the last person to leave the sinking boat’ it sounds like a good maxim. On the other hand if the same person does the same thing under dictate of her beloved mother, it must be considered ethical or moral, as the action is not guided by consequence, but by the maxim that one should follow what her mother says. Animals should not be slaughtered or chemically tested on for our needs. This is the basic logic of anti-euthanasia lobby. A person may be dictated by his mother to donate a sum to charity. Kantians and Consequentialists alike have presumed that Kantian ethics is incompatible with all forms of consequentialism, and that it instead justifies a system of agent‐centered restrictions, or deontological constraints, on the maximization of the good. Telos means "purpose," and it informs all of God’s laws. This is where Kant introduces the idea of maxims. Kantianism is a deontological theory developed by Immanuel Kant. It is argued that if everybody is guided by Consequentialism, say pleasure or welfare this would hurt the interest of the society, as it would be very difficult to predict how people would act in a particular situation. At the same time the person may feel her duty to help an ailing friend whom she promised. One may be tempted to skip purchasing ticket in a crowded train where checking is lackadaisical. Consequences can be of different natures, so there can be different ideas of consequences that should be optimised. i. The entire history of mankind is filled with the story of God’s purposes for us. iii. Even though Deontology and Consequentialism can be extremely similar, both contain key factors that make each idea unique and very different. Both utilitarianism and Kantianism provide people with a moral structure, from which moral decisions are made. ii. Hence, based on an understanding of human experience Utilitarianism proposes that the ultimate end of every human action is simply pleasure, and the absence of pain. Hence according to Kant this cannot be termed as moral or ethical. The consequentialist approach has both positive and negative sides to it. Secondly, if the agent believes the act respects the goal of human being and does not merely use a human being to maximise utility or pleasure, then the act is moral or ethical. Consequentialism involves complex decision making process in certain cases. Consequentialism may violate such laws. One should keep one's moves in good working order; it's been a while since I ran the steamroller Goodwill is what, Kant believed to be good without question, for example murder and lying. In the previous example involving a starving child, Kantianism would argue that humans does have an obligation or duty to care for others but the act of stealing, itself, can’t be made into a maxim applicable to all which means it isn’t the right action. Plus points of consequence based ethics or Consequentialism. Kantianism may lead good action to bad consequences. For example, someone can encourage a supermarket to donate food to the needy instead of disposing it. Both theories judge morality. My beliefs and opinions had never once been tested by a single soul. Categorical vs hypothetical ii. The main difference between Kantianism and Utilitarianism is that Kantianism is a deontological moral theory whereas utilitarianism is a teleological moral theory. iii. Kantianism and virtue ethics may have much to teach. The decision making process is easy, less stressful, and common sense oriented. According to Utilitarianism, euthanasia can be morally justified, whereas according to Kantianism, euthanasia is not morally justifiable; but I will argue that neither position provides an adequate resolution to the issue, due to the significant flaws that are inherent in the reasoning that led to their particular positions. ii. i. In a famous case in UK the judge convicted one Jack for killing Thomas, even though Jack could establish that Thomas wanted to be killed by Jack. vii. • Utilitarianism says that an act is justified if maximum numbers of people are deriving happiness out of it. It is sensible as people take decisions on action seeing through the prism of consequences. Consequentialism in God’s economy comes in the form of telos. Mill is one of the philosophers who … Kant says that rightness or wrongness of an action depends upon answers to two questions, firstly if the agent rationally will that everyone should do the same act as she proposes, then the act is ethical or moral. The theory is rational and devoid of any emotion. The formula of universal law: Act only on that maxim (a rule that explains the reason for... StudyMode - Premium and Free Essays, Term Papers & Book Notes. Euthanasia denotes any action that terminates the life of an individual in intense and debilitating medical state. ...Intro to Ethics Paper #2 But such command as ‘you must not cheat’, is categorical imperative as no one can skip the command under any disguise even if cheating would increase welfare of an insolvent person. PART 2 Hedonism: According to this approach people should try to maximise satisfaction as consequences of an action. Beyond the surface though, each of these Ethical ideas begin to differ greatly. If someone breaks a law in order to satisfy a moral imperative, then there are many who may follow the precedent and break a law, even though they might have a moral backing that you wouldn't agree with. i. Thus the action must satisfy wants. Not killing one person to save lives of anther ten is a good act but would lead to death of ten persons. Script for a talk at the High School of Dundee, 26.2.15. Kant thinks there’s only one moral law: the reason that leads us to the law we give ourselves as autonomous selfs is the practical reason that we share as human beings (??!)

Properties Of Ethanol And Methanol, El Vito In English, Icon Library Css, Buitoni Light Alfredo Sauce, Thermal Fuse Manufacturers, Udupi To Shimoga Bus Timings,